What are the findings of a jury in a sexual assault trial where the trial court repeatedly asked more questions than were necessary?

What is clear here is that the trial court repeatedly took it upon itself to direct the examination. Even if the court asked more questions than were necessary, that does not mean it lost its neutrality. There is nothing about the content of the court's questions demonstrates an absence of neutrality. Finally, we observe that the trial court instructed jurors that, they were ultimate judges of the facts. They were further instructed not to speculate why any objection had been sustained, nor to assume to be true any insinuation suggested by a question asked of a witness. Finally, they were told that nothing the court said or did, or any questions it may have asked, was intended to intimate or suggest what they should find, or that the court believed or disbelieved any witness. We presume the jury followed these instructions and considered each witness's answers, not the fact that questions were posed by the trial court, in its assessment of the evidence. (See People v. Sanchez, supra, 26 Cal.4th at p. 852.) Accordingly, we find no judicial misconduct.